Following Pelosi's visit to Taiwan
Why does the Gulf support the "one China" principle in the Taiwan crisis?
Pelosi's visit to Taiwan provoked Beijing into using cautionary phrases and harsh language.
Reuters
Chinese amphibious vehicles conduct an exercise in the eastern theater of the Chinese military command.
Reuters
picture
The basic rule from which the Gulf states are based in their political stances towards crises that occur in the world, is summarized in two dimensions: the difficulty of letting people’s interests be controlled by the political whims of some leaders in the world, and the need for a comprehensive strategic vision for the dimensions of any decision, especially if it comes to countries influential in politics. International.
From this standpoint, we can understand how the Gulf states think about the Sino-Taiwan crisis, which escalated after the visit of the US House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, to Taiwan.
international responsibility
The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries surprised the world twice this year: the first when they chose not to take sides with the US and Western positions on the Ukrainian crisis, after Russia was provoked by NATO attempts to annex Ukraine, despite an agreement with Washington in 1991 not to seek the alliance’s eastward expansion over border with Russia.
The position of the Gulf states was frank and consistent with international agreements, and the UAE clearly stated that Russia had the right to guarantee its security.
And the Gulf states maintained their balanced position, despite repeated attempts by the United States to change it, at least by trying to increase oil production to compensate for the deficit caused by the sanctions on Moscow.
It is noted here that the position of the Gulf states, especially the UAE and Saudi Arabia, was logical and objective not to involve themselves in the Ukrainian crisis.
To reserve space for movement and help find a solution or a way out of the crisis.
The second time that the world was surprised by a Gulf position, was the UAE's announcement on August 4 of its support for China's sovereignty and unity and the importance of respecting the "one China" principle.
It called on the UAE, which is diplomatically active worldwide and is a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council, to abide by relevant UN resolutions.
The state also expressed its concern about the impact of any provocative visits on balance, stability and international peace.
It is possible to stand on what is behind these Gulf positions from objective premises, by referring to the determinants of Gulf foreign policy in general, especially towards major powers and interactions within the global system. Gulf interests, taking into account the foundations and principles of security and stability in the world, foremost among which is non-interference in internal affairs and respect for the sovereignty of states.
In addition to not getting involved in crises or problems in which the Gulf Cooperation Council countries are not a party, while being careful to adopt “positive neutrality” towards them;
That is, to avoid taking sides with any party without objective justification or in isolation from the rules of international law.
In this context, the stances of the Gulf Cooperation Council countries on the Chinese-American tension over Taiwan represent a practical embodiment of those principles and rules.
This is what we can rightly consider a practical translation of the concept of “international responsibility” that some countries may fail to abide by or ignore if it conflicts with their policies or interests, while the Gulf states always adhere to it, even if it conflicts with their direct interests or results in political or political burdens. economical or of any kind.
What is the case with a crisis such as China and Taiwan, which provide an example of an unjustified rush by a party (Washington) towards unnecessary behavior or behavior that has no legal or objective basis to justify it?
Therefore, the exaggerated escalation that quickly developed from a crisis and then a war in Ukraine should have represented a lesson for what should be avoided in the management of international relations of ill-considered steps or decisions.
And after the whole world has incurred a heavy price, and still is, because of that ongoing war and the resulting crises in food, energy and the smooth supply of many commodities and industries in different regions of the world;
It was assumed that the explosion of a new crisis with a major power such as China, and for an unclear reason, is the last thing the world needs now.
vision of stability
The firm stance of the Gulf states towards any war is rejection, given the seriousness of the consequences to development programs and regional and global stability.
But because the world is not perfect and international relations are not managed by moral or even legal standards, the Gulf states have awareness and realism that makes them accept exceptions that may be imposed by circumstances, as happened previously in the war to liberate Kuwait, and later to restore legitimacy in Yemen, but those same exceptions In the direction of restoring stability and preserving the sovereignty of states, and not the other way around.
Hence, the Gulf vision of the Sino-Taiwan crisis sees attempts to provoke Beijing and manipulate international understandings as a fundamental contradiction with the sovereignty of the unified Chinese state.
This Gulf position is consistent with the world's trends, especially in Europe and Asia. No one is enthusiastic about opening a new front of crises in the world, but everyone wants to recognize the importance of cooperation by all countries to face the current challenges instead of being preoccupied with opening new conflicts.
It is noted here the severity of the Chinese reaction and its use of warning phrases and a sharp and definitive tone. This sharp Chinese speech also included messages to the United States and the Taiwanese leadership calling for understanding and respect for the sovereignty of countries. China is a major country that will not accept its reduction, and it is easy for the observer to extrapolate the implications of Beijing's reactions to a visit Pelosi to Taiwan, and what she refers to that if this crisis erupts, no one will be able to reduce its risks or even estimate its repercussions on the international system, although the visit is for a “political” American official and belongs specifically to Parliament and not to the American government, which means that it does not represent the official position of the House. the White;
China's moves did not stop at the political objections that were sharp and stern, but Beijing also made direct military moves that reveal, on the one hand, the extent of the anger caused by Pelosi's visit, and on the other hand, carry a clear message that China is ready to use armed force to establish and confirm the principle of "China" One” practically.
It must be noted here that Beijing has repeatedly clarified its position in the past, then confirmed and repeated it immediately after Pelosi's intention to visit Taiwan was announced, which calls into question Washington's goals, which can be considered "deliberately" to provoke China with this visit.
realistic policy
The strength of the Gulf-US relations has suggested that the Gulf states may take sides with Washington’s position, or at least remain silent regarding the recent international crises, as there is a prevailing belief among some that the Gulf states link their political positions to the United States, or that these positions always tend towards US policy, but These two global crises (Ukraine and Taiwan) prompted the Gulf states to abandon the usual traditional reservations and openly declare their position, which was considered by some observers as new and striking in Gulf policies, and a practical indication of what the Gulf states have repeatedly declared that their foreign policies are mainly looking for development and security.
In practical translation, this means striving for global stability, preserving the unity and sovereignty of states, and working to achieve common interests and mutual benefits on the basis of cooperation and international understandings.
From this perspective, China is compatible with the Gulf vision in its foreign relations, and this consensus has been clearly demonstrated during the past decade, with Beijing understanding the policies of the Gulf countries based on preserving sovereignty and not interfering in internal affairs under false names or false slogans, as the Gulf countries have become fully convinced. That violating the sovereignty of states is not tolerated, and should not be tolerated to any degree.
This conviction was formed during the period of what was known as the "Arab Spring", when the Gulf states sensed American intentions (including Democrats in particular) to invest in chaos to create a strategic climate that serves Washington's interests in the short term.
Gulf voices rose, at the time, calling for the United States to review its policies regarding support for some troublemakers in countries under the item of defending political freedoms, as the lessons of history prove the disasters that result from compromising the sovereignty of countries, starting with Iraq two decades ago, passing through the countries it struck. The Arab Spring” entered into chaos and semi-collapse, such as Syria and Libya, although the original situation in those countries - with some notes on it - was sufficient to maintain security and stability, which is the basis of all development work.
Therefore, the Gulf countries’ view of the Taiwan crisis is not the result of momentary calculations, but rather stems from a future vision and anticipation of the risks and crises that can be anticipated, and interacting with them by clarifying these risks explicitly and realistically for all those who deliberately or unintentionally go towards threatening global stability.
Gulf stances on these crises and developments are not a regression from keenness on good relations with the United States of America, nor are they a desire to oppose them.
But it is a realistic policy that is not affected by the existing friendship and does not contradict it, but rather embodies the objective and principled premises that the Gulf states consider necessary for global security and stability, which is part of their security and stability.
• The strength of the Gulf-US relations has suggested that the Gulf states may take sides with Washington's position, or at least they will remain silent regarding the recent international crises, as there is a prevailing belief among some that the Gulf states link their political positions to the United States, or that these positions always tend towards American policy. However, these two global crises (Ukraine and Taiwan) prompted the Gulf states to abandon the usual traditional reservation and openly declare their position.
Mohammed Khalfan Al-Sawafi ■ Emirati writer
Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news